“Apple is reportedly set to move its Mac mini production lines back to the US with Foxconn Electronics (Hon Hai Precision Industry) to be responsible of handling establishment, according to sources from the upstream supply chain,” Aaron Lee and Joseph Tsai report for DigiTimes.

“Mac mini shipments are expected to reach 1.4 million units in 2012, up more than 40% on year, and with the specification upgrade in October 2012, shipments are expected to rise another 30% on year to 1.8 million units in 2013, according to the latest figures from Digitimes Research,” Lee and Tsai report.

Who would want to work in these new domestic production facilities? No US citizen would want to do that work or work for a few dollars per day. Are you planning to let Mexicans into the US to work there? Would you want Apple to pay auto worker wages to US assemblers and then pay double for any Apple products?

” Too bad all that stimulus money went to cronies and unions instead of those “Shovel Ready Jobs”.”

Yea, like teachers , police officers, firefighters and the like but only to a point. The republican governors elected to use some of the money to plug holes in their state budgets instead of creating jobs. Congress allocates money but it is the states that create the projects such as upgrading/repairing roads, bridges and other projects.

So, you are saying that you would like a job doing . . . what? There are a few jobs maintaining and setting up automation and a one time construction boom and then only a few jobs. The capital cost of an automated plant in the US when compared to the labour cost in China is huge and I suggest that the US still cannot compete. Most of the jobs that assembly plants bring will be taken up by Mexican Americans and not be very high paid.

Another Rush Limbaugh graduate of the dumbing down of humanity. Unemployment benefits in most states is about $250.00-$275.00 per week, before taxes. This is about equal to minimum wages of about $7.00 an hour, hardly enough to pay for rent/mortgage, utilities, phone, credit card bills, transportation and food.

Pray tell why should the most valuable company on Earth put up with paying more than it has to to the elected idiots in Washington who can’t even balance the government checkbook? The tax laws in this country are a clear message to business: “Invest your overseas money overseas, and don’t bring it home to create jobs, or we’ll punish you for it.” If you call that “corporate welfare,” I call you “an idiot.”

Besides, it is a good idea for industry to re-evaluate the feasibility of domestic production in view of the rising living standards and wages in countries where offshore production is currently located. The choice will be between migrating production facilities to yet other emerging economies, or to consider bringing them back home. This is a cyclic problem that arises every 10-15 years.

Since Apple decided that we cannot VESA mount new iMacs, I plan to get a couple mini’s in 2013 and maybe a Pro in 2014 if it makes since. Maybe, Apple to come to it’s senses about VESA and the iMac by then too so I have some options.

Bringing production back to US sounds great, I just hopes it creates some U.S. jobs!

Now that it’s 6+ years into the glossy-only era at Apple — with even the Retina and new iMac screens being like dark mirrors where you can clearly see the reflected image of what is behind you — and now that the Mac Mini’s are slowly getting to the level where it’s fast enough for most needs — I regret that my next Mac desktop will have to be the Mac Mini plus an Eizo matte screen.

I am tired of hearing about this issue from people who don’t know how to evaluate a monitor for the clearest possible image. Mat finishes leave every pixel distorted and fuzzy. Reflections are not limited to just what is there but reflect many very fuzzy images and distort the whole colour palette shown. If you don’t like reflections, control the source of those reflections.

You clearly have no experience or any clue about how good matte screens are. You are just another glossy screened bigot. Apple lost a sales for certain when they left matte behind. I personally put off buying a mac for several years until they offered a matte screen for laptops. I will never, EVER buy a glossy screened computer. I’d sooner go linux than buy glossy.

From what you said, I believe that you likely won’t buy a Macbook Pro because it doesn’t have an optical drive or a floppy drive or a VGA output or a . . .

My take away from your reply is that Apple has no clue about ‘the best’ technology and that they need you to tell them how to produce the best possible consumer products. I wonder who is the ‘bigot’ here?

I used to mostly discount the complaints about glossy displays because I seldom encountered any significant problems with reflections. In office settings where you have some control over your lighting conditions, glossy displays are not much of a problem. But, when you go outdoors or visit another indoor setting that limits your ability to control position/lighting, reflections can be problematic.

That said, there are third party films to reduce display reflectivity. It is not clear to me that It is worth Apple’s effort to offer BTO display options for matte/glossy.

Beyond “third world” making no sense on the face of it, the full meaning and implications of this far too common phrase are enormously ignorant. It’s based on the idea that certain nations are inherently superior to all other nations, and that poverty and slavery of certain types of people don’t harm you – as if these problems occur in a completely different world. It’s a patently false notion, given how increasingly interconnected the world is. It’s a pernicious lie based on a racist ideology that has no connection with how world economics actually works. Therefore, I don’t abide to this phrase being casually passed around.

Explaining your position is acceptable, regardless of whether the reader agrees with you. Name-calling without such justification (and probably even with it), is less-so.

I don’t quite agree with some of your assumptions, but since my original comments were snarkily tongue-in-cheek (and not intentionally insensitive to the plight of all mankind) and since this is an ill-suited place for a discussion of the human condition (and since I have to hit the road), I’ll have to leave it at that.

I agree with Grrilla on this, Kayan. I understand your objections, but the phrase is not based on racism. It is generally based on economics and oft difficult standards of living. The phrase is not “being casually passed around.” It is a common race-neutral phrase used to identify certain nations sharing similar economic and living challenges. It is common usage and should be understood as such though you are certainly free to use different words in its place.

It’s the accepted term. And it’s used more often to indicate economic status vs. political superiority (only a person with an axe to grind would make a racial connection).

So, don’t waste our time sniping at a poster for using “third world” in it’s presently accepted definition. Go author a website or petition the UN to find some other PC phrase/term that will eventually be seen as racist by another person such as yourself.

Granted, but I still don’t see any value in calling countries “third world.” It’s a gross generalization that encourages a lazy world outlook. And even when it’s not intended to be insulting, the negative connotation is still there. Keep saying it if you want, but I think it’s an outdated phrase and everyone is better off leaving it behind.

Prepare for the Mac Mini’s official positioning as the US market’s home entertainment centre, and the ‘made in america’ flag-waving ads, with resulting spike in cable-dumpers. I’d love to see that (not the ads though).